The national media has attacked a Southern State for daring to vote on when a human life begins.

It is a scientific question. It is not a religious question. Because an unborn child has its own DNA and its own heart beat these are scientific facts this indicate the unborn is a human life.

If you are in favor of abortion, build your case by saying that are things more important that protecting a human life.

Sally Quinn, writes in the Washington Post, ”Here’s what it also means, for those on both sides of the abortion debate: According to the logic of the Mississippi initiative, anyone who destroys a fertilized egg will be guilty of taking the life of a ‘person.’ Let’s think about that. Terminating a pregnancy at six weeks has always been murder to their way of thinking. But with this amendment, we’re talking about something much more subtle, much more severe: If you take a morning after pill, if you use an IUD, if you end an ectopic pregnancy, if you find that the fetus is severely impaired and terminate, if you destroy an embryo that was created through in vitro fertilization, you would be guilty of murder. If you terminate the fetus to save the life of the mother you are making a choice and therefore committing murder. If you are the victim of rape or incest and you terminate, that too would be murder.”

Ms. Quinn forgot to mention the predominant reason for abortion; a baby would be inconvenient. Most want to enjoy all the sex they desire without any consequences.

Why didn’t those who opposed the Mississippi initiative simply give their scientific evidence that the unborn is not a human life?